Print

Print


Dear SACO Task Group,
        Thanks for your input regarding the workplan and the charge. Here is
the latest version of the workplan after swapping times between the
utilities and LC parts of the contribution and distribution mechanism topics
as suggested by Hugh and supported by messages from Susan, Tom and Linda:

Revised workplan (March 7)
Week 1. (March 3-7) General views on charge and workplan (including any
amendments), and verification of email receipt.
Week 2. (March 10-14) Membership criteria.
Week 3-4. (March 17-28) Membership responsibilities and benefits.
Week 5-6. (March 31-April 11) Contributor perspective on contribution and
distribution mechanism.
Week 7. (April 14-18) LC perspective on contribution and distribution
mechanism.
Week 8. (April 21-25) Utilities' role in contribution and distribution
mechanism.
Week 9-10. (April 28-May 9) Supporting documentation.
Week 11. (May 12-16) Training support.
Week 12. (May 19-23) Feedback.
Week 13. (May 26-30) Review of discussion and plan for next steps.
Week 14. (June 2-6) Drafting preliminary report.

        I do not have any news yet on the RLG liaison to our task group. I
sent an email asking Ana Cristan about this and will let you know when she
responds. I hope someone will be assigned soon, but it seems to me that we
should go ahead with our discussions, especially since we do not plan to
take up the issue of the utilities role until late April.

        Since there have been no major issues raised or other significant
comments regarding the charge other than those from Hugh, I take this as a
sign that the charge is clear as written and not in need of clarification or
revision. Please speak up if you think otherwise. Just for good measure, I
will copy it below:


PCC Task Group on SACO Program Development
Charge:
        1) To identify institutional/participant needs to facilitate subject
proposal contributions for inclusion in LCSH.
        2) To recommend parameters for membership in SACO
        3) To propose a list of responsibilities that accompany SACO
membership, both from the PCC and the participant perspective.
It is expected that by satisfying these charges the task group will be
developing recommendations for the programmatic structure for the SACO
Program of the PCC, as directed by action item 6d of the PCC Policy
Committee meeting summary <http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/pocosum02.pdf>
November, 2002. The final report of the task force will contain
recommendations including those that:
        1) Outline a SACO training scenario, including what responsibilities
the PCC has in providing/sharing the existing subject cataloging
documentation or that which might be newly developed.
        2) Suggest a mechanism for facilitating the contribution and
distribution of subject proposals among subject trainers and training
institutions for internal review, for final review by LC editorial review
staff, and for distribution of approved headings to the community at large.
        3) Identify whose responsibility it should be to implement each of
the elements described..

        Monday we will begin our discussions on Membership criteria (part 2
of the charge). What expectations are reasonable and desirable for SACO
members? Quantity? Quality? For perspective on current and recent statistics
of SACO participants there are links to pdf tables from the webpage at
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/stats/stats.html  I look forward to hearing
your thoughts on this topic. In the meantime, have a great weekend. Thanks,
Jimmie